How can Christians believe in Christ when his story is vitrually identical to that of Horus?

It is mostly due to a lack of intelligence but fear and ignorance also play a part.

First, because there is evidence that Christ actually existed. (There were witnesses. Historical documents. A change in the way time was calculated associated with the time of his birth. We have his genealogy. etc.)

Secondly, the coming of the Messiah was foretold in great detail for centuries before Jesus Christ was born. The first prophecy about Jesus was recorded to have been told to Adam and Eve, so ever since the creation of the world prophets were telling about the coming Christ! Some of these prophecies, therefore, predate the so-called gods you listed.

How could someone believe in those gods when they just copied Old Testament prophecies?

As men began to invent idols and other "gods", they would attribute to them characteristics of the true God. This, in part, was an attempt to convince people that their so-called "god" was the true God of prophecy.

For a more detailed discussion, please see the resources below:

.

Easy. Jesus is new; Horus, Osiris, Bacchus, and Dyonisys are old. Most people tend to pay attention to things that are new.

extremely, i replaced into in basic terms discovering this the day gone by, and that i haven't any concept the place they have been given Horus from...his tale is rather distinctive, in accordance to Egyptian mythology. Now Mithra on the different hand...it extremely is in basic terms about like a carbon reproduction. Even the story of Krishna is close to comparable. Dyonisys on the different hand is a splash bit a stretch, yet biblical scholars nonetheless word some similarities. Edit: So I re-checked Horus online....in the temple of Amun on the region of Luxor in Egypt seems a chain of scenes depicting the divine delivery of the king/pharaoh of the 18th Dynasty (c. 1570-1293 BCE), Amenhotep/Amenhotpe or Amenophis III, who reigned throughout the time of the 14th century BCE (c. 1390-c. 1352 BCE). The Luxor nativity imagery represents an substantial artifact demonstrating substantial pre-Christian religious motifs of course integrated into Christianity. So human beings claiming that Horus is like Jesus are extremely refering to Amenhotep III of Luxor.

If the two are absolutely identical and share the same moral teachings than by all means believe in Horus. Religion does not matter. The only thing that matters to God is morality... so be moral with your belief or be moral with your unbelief but remember that his definition of morality will always be different from yours.

This is fairly silly. There are superficial similarities between some of these myths and the story of Jesus, but only if you read the myths very selectively and cherry-pick the versions that suit your theory. Moreover, you have to rob these stories of their own particularity to make them all fit your thesis.

On the other hand, there are what we might call 'archetypes' in some of these stories which speak very directly to human experience of the world - themes like death and resurrection, incarnation and sacrifice. These are themes found in many cultures in one form or another, and they are present too in the Christian story of salvation and redeemption.

It's a common claim that the story of Jesus has nothing new in it, but that in other religions similar events were said to have occurred. For example, the Greek hero Heracles (whom we know as Hercules) was said to be the product of the intercourse of the Greek God Zeus and a human princess, Alcmene. To the sceptics, it would seem that Christianity borrowed a well-known religious phenomenon to account for the remarkable life and death of Jesus Christ.

However, a little bit of checking shows it's not the same basic story at all. In order to produce Heracles, Zeus had to have sexual intercourse with a woman. The same is true for all the accounts of gods having intercourse with human virgins. Yet at no stage in the biblical account of the conception of Jesus is the Holy Spirit, or God the Father, ever spoken of as taking human form and fraternising with Mary.

Likewise, these early Christians were not syncretists - building together a makeshift religion from bits of other religions, and held together by the name of Jesus. Rather, they were soberly recounting the facts that they had learned first-hand. Luke's gospel account was likely taken from Mary herself, who live on after Jesus' death and resurrection, being taken into the apostle John's home.

And you fail to take into account that the truth of God is known to God's arch-enemy, Satan, who specialises in distorting that truth. Is God triune in His Being? Then Satan brings triads of gods into his pantheon of deities. But no triad is the same as the unique trinity that is God! There are subtle but important differences. Major on what you take to be similarities, if you like. Just bear in mind that you have swallowed Satan's bait and he's reeling you in, hook, line and sinker.

Yes, I have searched this too on the Internet. The parallels are too concise to be a mere coincidence. This is nothing new. The Roman Catholic Church plagiarized just about everything, including Mayday and Walpurgis. Not to mention the winter solstice festival.

Identical in every way except for things like all the details. All the examples you state have completely different storied behind them if you actually bother to look. Ask any historian.

how can you say anything about Christian? Christ is the king of kings and lord of lords and you will be judged according to your knowledge so be careful of what you say from now on